8 réponses à ce sujet

[wicked cool]

More of an observation than a critique as ive been here since Dao.
Switched from 360-pc (ultra) and o feel that the graphic quality of npcs in dao/da2 are superior to Dai

Examples-not considering hair/beards

Bartand-superior eye and face structure compared to any npc dwarf in dai except varric

Allistair-feel hes declined over every game

Berahton xbox google images of him from Dao and for a early game npc superior to many npcs in haven on ultra

Shale vs dai red golems.
Old npcs in dao vs old in dai

[thats1evildude]

There are no red golems in DAI. There are red templar behemoths - living people turned into monsters.

[wicked cool]

The point is certain models in the older games appear to be if higher quality than dai.
They are red templars but they remind of of golems

[FKA_Servo]

I think you might be occupying a different reality than everyone else. With the obvious and notable exception of hair and beards - everyone in DAI looks orders of magnitude better than DA2 and DAO. My god, DAO has some of the samiest, ugliest NPCs in any game released in the last few years.

 

Alistair looks about as different as the numerous other NPCs who've weathered two engine changes.

[wicked cool]

You might be right
So googled images of dwarves in da2 (dougall-the dwarf that helps finance your mission and later on shows up threatening hawke) and bartrand and i would argue that these games did ugly characters better
I would also argue that they fid a better job with older people withe the possible exception of the leader of the chantry

Ive seen many people try and recreate hawke and i havent seen any that can duplicate even the basic face structure

Elven arms in dai are dtrange looking. No human bodies have muscle tone. I remember in da2 when hawke gets a certain stmor and his muscles are ripped. I argue they had to downgrade

[wicked cool]

Arishok in da2 (take away hair) is graphically far superior to iron bull and any fan created quanari. My opinion

[FKA_Servo]

You sound like you're arguing art style. If you're arguing art style, then I broadly agree with you in some cases. The qunari are stylistically superior in DA2 to either of their other iterations. Likewise, the elves - looked best when they were just short humans with pointy ears as opposed to the pixified abominations from DA2 and DAI. Humans look mostly awesome, no more giant paddleboard hands or resting Bioware face syndrome. Dwarves look great, particularly their proportions - they've never looked worse than they did in DAO, though. But then, DAO is an ugly game even for its time, I think.

 

The quality of the visuals - the models, particularly, but the overall aesthetic - nope, I can't see it. They're miles better in DAI than either of the past games.

[wicked cool]

Maybe that's it. Im a fan of the big nosed ugly dwarves
We have a better char creator and yet npcs cant be duplicated from past games
Am i also wrong that the visual styles of hawkes armor were better

[FKA_Servo]

Maybe that's it. Im a fan of the big nosed ugly dwarves
We have a better char creator and yet npcs cant be duplicated from past games
Am i also wrong that the visual styles of hawkes armor were better

 

Because it's built differently, in a completely different engine. Of course they're going to look different.

 

WRT armor - I think you possibly prefer them. I thought some of DA2's armor was great. I thought some was awful. I thought the roid arm that magically appeared when you equipped the Champion's armor was beyond stupid.

 

Overall, I think the armor design in DAI is attractive and cohesive - far more so than either DAO or DA2. But it's good to have preferences.